List FotMob TV guide countries with codes and names, then use each code to query TV guide and channel endpoints by region.
FotMob TV guide country directory. Lists the countries in FotMob's football TV guide country selector, each with a country code (such as us, gb, de or jp) and a name. Use a code with the FotMob TV guide and TV guide channels endpoints. It takes no parameters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It correctly discloses that the tool takes no parameters and returns a code/name list, implying a safe read, but says nothing about caching, rate limits, or whether the list is static or localized. Adequate for a trivial read-only endpoint, but not rich.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with what it is, then examples of the code, then how to use the output. No filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a no-parameter directory whose only job is to map codes to names and feed two sibling endpoints, nothing an agent needs is missing. Since all data returns are described inline and no output schema exists, the description is complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description usefully documents the output shape (a `code` such as `us`, `gb`, `de`, `jp` plus a name) and how that code is consumed downstream, which is more than the empty schema conveys.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb+resource: a directory that lists countries in FotMob's football TV guide country selector, and describes the returned fields (code, name). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling fotmob_tv_guide and fotmob_tv_guide_channels tools, which it explicitly references.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly tells the agent how this feeds others: 'Use a code with the FotMob TV guide and TV guide channels endpoints,' routing to the correct siblings. No when-not-to-use case, but the intended role in the toolchain is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.